Re: [PATCH 2.6.27-rc3 26/29] mdb: export task_curr

[jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com]

>
> * jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>
>> >
>> > * jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> > On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 9:14 AM,  <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >> export the task_curr function to the module based kernel debugger
>> to
>> >> >> enable
>> >> >> process back tracing and state display.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Vernon Merkey
>> (jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --- a/kernel/sched.c    2008-08-13 14:22:32.000000000 -0600
>> >> >> +++ b/kernel/sched.c    2008-08-13 11:56:03.000000000 -0600
>> >> >> @@ -1736,6 +1736,9 @@
>> >> >>  {
>> >> >>        return cpu_curr(task_cpu(p)) == p;
>> >> >>  }
>> >> >> +#if defined(CONFIG_MDB_MODULE)
>> >> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(task_curr);
>> >> >> +#endif
>> >> >
>> >> > We usually don't export symbols conditionally, especially in core
>> >> kernel
>> >> > code.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Well,then please suggest how a kernel debugger can be module based
>> and
>> >> still be able to get this information some other way that's generic
>> >> and minimal impact.
>> >
>> > FYI, there's a built-in kernel debugger in the upstream kernel
>> already:
>> > kernel/kgdb.c - and it does not need that export.
>> >
>> > So if you are interested in kernel debuggers i'd suggest to work with
>> > the KGDB folks to extend it with whatever feature-set is missing.
>> >
>> > They are friendly, very easy to work with and are open to the
>> > thousands-of-years-old scientific method of not duplicating effort,
>> > working together, going forward gradually, etc.
>> >
>> > 	Ingo
>> >
>>
>> Sorry, but I have my own path and direction, [...]
>
> doing things alone is your unalienable personal right, and since thus
> you apparently didnt intend your patch to be included in the Linux
> kernel that's as far as my interest in this as a maintainer goes.
>
> Thanks,
>
> 	Ingo
>

Ingo,

The patches are submitted so you can stop putting words in my mouth.  If
it goes in, it goes in -- its submitted.  Your comment about this export
and comparing it to kgdb demonstrates 1) you have never even looked at the
code of either debugger in this area 2) you were unaware I did not need
this exported except as a module 3) which kgdb and kdb do not support
either.

A maintainer would be expected to actually review the code.  Its clear
from the comments above you have not, so I see little interest anyway from
you, so who cares.

Jeff